U.S. v. Price, 76 M.J. 136

Military Justice Personnel: Military Judge: Duties and Responsibilities

1. a military judge shall not accept a plea of guilty without making such inquiry of the accused as shall satisfy the judge that there is a factual basis for the plea; during the providence inquiry, a military judge has an affirmative duty to conduct a detailed inquiry into the offenses charged, the accused’s understanding of the elements of each offense, the accused’s conduct, and the accused’s willingness to plead guilty; judges are advised and cautioned against regarding the use of conclusions and leading questions that merely extract from an accused ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses during the providence inquiry; a military judge must elicit actual facts from an accused and not merely legal conclusions

Military Justice Personnel: Military Judge: Discretion

1. it is an abuse of discretion if a military judge accepts a guilty plea without an adequate factual basis to support it
2. in this case, the military judge did not abuse his discretion by eliciting additional details of the charged offenses during appellant’s providence inquiry, where the judge’s questions during the plea inquiry were consistent with the requirements of RCM 910(e), the questions were closely connected to the offenses for which appellant was pleading guilty, and the military judge did not range far afield during the providence inquiry

Trial Stages: Merits: Guilty Pleas

1. a military judge shall not accept a plea of guilty without making such inquiry of the accused as shall satisfy the judge that there is a factual basis for the plea; during the providence inquiry, a military judge has an affirmative duty to conduct a detailed inquiry into the offenses charged, the accused’s understanding of the elements of each offense, the accused’s conduct, and the accused’s willingness to plead guilty; judges are advised and cautioned against regarding the use of conclusions and leading questions that merely extract from an accused ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses during the providence inquiry; a military judge must elicit actual facts from an accused and not merely legal conclusions
2. an accused retains the right to withdraw from a guilty plea in a timely manner if he or she believes a military judge’s questions are objectionable; in the alternative, an accused can resolutely and respectfully decline to answer specific questions posed by a military judge, although this action may cause the military judge to decide not to accept the guilty plea

Trial Stages: Sentence and Punishment: Evidence

1. although sworn admissions made during a providence inquiry can be admissible for sentencing purposes as aggravating evidence, the use of such admissions is restricted if the military judge has ranged far afield during the providence inquiry, such as when a military judge explores uncharged conduct that is not closely connected to the offense to which the accused has pleaded guilty

Trial Stages: Appeals: Standards of Review, Burdens, etc.

1. an appellate court reviews a military judge’s decision to accept a guilty plea for an abuse of discretion, and the appellant bears the burden of establishing that the military judge abused that discretion
2. an appellate court affords military judges substantial deference when they decide which facts to elicit during a providence inquiry in order to establish a factual basis for a guilty plea